FRONTIERS OF ZOOLOGYDale A. Drinnon has been a researcher in the field of Cryptozoology for the past 30+ years and has corresponded with Bernard Heuvelmans and Ivan T. Sanderson. He has a degree in Anthropology from Indiana University and is a freelance artist and writer. Motto: "I would rather be right and entirely alone than wrong in the company with all the rest of the world"--Ambroise Pare', "the father of modern surgery", in his refutation of fake unicorn horns.

Thursday, 12 September 2013

Eastern Bigfoot, New Demonstrations

A facebook Friend of mine sent me photos of a variety of casts he hasd made in the Midwestern part of the US (mostly in Ohio I think. I selected two that I thought were exceptionally representative of the "Ape" (Swamp Ape/Wood Ape) and more humanlike (Actually Neanderthaloid) tracks out of the dozen or more examples that were on display. Both kinds are called Skunk Apes in Florida and Brush Apes (etc) in Texas. I also added drawings of the equivalent foot bottoms for an actual ape and a human being, from a textbook illustration that went on display on this blog a while back. I hoped to get a better impression of the "Long and thin" types of ape footprint which more closely resembles an orangutan's foot.

Here is a selection of the Unknown apes from around the Pacific rim All of them seem to be just variations on the orangutan and derived from the ground-dwelling "Fossil Pongo" that inhabited China about the same time as Gigantopithecus. The fate of their classification in general depends on decisions regarding some of the samples that we already have. If the Yeti DNA samples, Orang Pendek hair samples, Yeren samples and even the "Fossil Pongo" are all classified in the same species as the commoner orangutans, we will not have a Cryptozoological situation, we will only have an expanded range for a known species. At present tis is a quandary.
.

Neanderthal as Wildman from "Yowie Hunter"

Our other problem is that the "Hairy Cavemen" such as the Neanderthals turn out have interbred with us and so they were the same species as the rest of us. Furthermore at some point in the development of our species, the hairless tropical mutant form at some point broke out into the territory of the more cold-adapted Northern forms of our species and predominated over them. The situation follows this mock-up:

And presumably this is the end result of the "out of Africa"movement.

But that means that the hairy wildmen that persist in pockets of wilderness worldwide (and which includes both pygmy, normal-sized, and giant variations) Is only another kind of people. That was my conclusion made decades ago and Im sticking to it. The problem is that these "Hairy Primitives" (as Ivan Sanderson called them) are also not Cryptozoological subjects they are a known species
(Below is what could be called a cosplay for "Old Yellow-top, a Canadian example of the more manlike Eastern Bigfoot.)

-out of which I discount as separate categories the true giants, marked hominids, Neandertaloids, erectus hominids and proto-pygmys, and the last four of these on the grounds that they are not only probably variants of one species, but that species is most likely not separable from Homo sapiens. I retain the categories neo-giants, unknown pongid, giant monkeys and allow the mer-beings but also keep that category as a questionable status. [There is a good chance that many if not most sightings in the Unknown Pongid and Giant Monkey categories are of animals in known species and the categories are also invalid for that reason]

In this case, the categories unknown pongid, giant monkey and merfolk are NOT unified categories representing a single cryptid as a single species per category. The categories are thus also invalid as formulated. However, in each of those categories I have also eliminated some candidates such that the unknown pongids of Africa are removed from unknown status - they are very likely displaced or unusual chimpanzees and gorillas. The remaining Asiatic and American pongids are all mostly like orangutans and do form a recognisable sequence, although they may not belong to the same species ... By the same token, ALL of the giant monkeys are very likely merely outsized monkeys of known species, except for the South American Isnachi. It should be noted that it was a major error to make one category for both Old World and New World monkeys in the same group.

ADDITIONAL:
My Friend Jeffrey Patterson on Facebook has a collection of some pretty recognizable faces found in so-called "Blobsquatch" videos. One of the recent ones he has sent to me has that distinctive "Caveman" look: it is an Ohio "Grassman"

I told him that one was clear enough I could probably recognize him if I should see him again.

And another one from a 2008 video posted on YouTube is a clear profile of a young ape:

And I am very nearly 100% certain both of these are exactly what they seem to be at first glance. They are the more humanlike and more apelike versions of the Eastern Bigfoot, Swamp Ape, Skunk Ape or Wood ape. And typical of both categories over much of Asia, Australia, North America and South America. And neither of them are really at all mysterious when you come right down to it.

1 comment:

Good article Dale. I think the hypothesis of Neanderthals as very hairy Homo sapien forms is quite likely, and I had written on this as my very first blog article. I expect more evidence of this to arise in the near future. Furthermore, the 2008 young ape profile image is also quite interesting and certainly shares some apparent features with the known nonhuman great apes. It will be exciting to see if the Oxford Collateral Hominid Project findings validate your claims.

This blog does NOT allow anonymous comments. All comments are moderated to filter out abusive and vulgar language and any posts indulging in abusive and insulting language shall be deleted without any further discussion.

Popular Posts

In order to be fair and have more choices, there are now two Popular Posts lists: the first one is for the last 30 days and the second one is for all-time favorites. Some posts may appear on both lists temporarily.

Associated Sites

Disclaimer

In Accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, any copyright material on display here is under Fair Use without any claim of ownership or any profit accrued by the display. The Material herein is for non-profit educational or criticism puposes only. Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 106 and 106a, the fair use of a copyrighted work including reproduction and distribution of said material as specified in that section, for purposes of education, news reporting, commentary or criticism, scholarship or research, to persons who have expressed a prior interest in receiving such material for such purposes, is NOT an infringement.